Background The establishment of the International Court
Why the international was established? The formation of the International Court (International Court of Justice / ICJ) is inseparable from the results of an international conference held in San Francisco in 1945. The Conference also gave birth to the United Nations (The United Nations / UN) which is an international organization that has international legal personal.
The idea of the birth of the United Nations is inseparable from the concept of the formation of the League of Nations (League of Nations) in 1922 which also established the Permanent International Court (The Permanent Court of International Justice / PCIJ) in a bid to maintain peace and efforts to resolve the dispute peacefully.
But there are fundamental differences between the PCIJ and the ICJ is that the state members of the League of Nations does not automatically become a member of PCIJ. This is different from UN member automatically is also a member of or party to litigants in the International Court of Justice under section 19 (1) Charter of the International Court of Justice.
International Court of Justice set up under a statute known as the Statute of the International Court of Justice. This Statute was established by the statutes of the Permanent International Court of Justice / PCIJ had disbanded with various adjustments and reforms according to circumstances and the new organization as one of the main organs of the United Nations.
Thus emerged a few opinion stating that the International Court of Justice is the successor of the Permanent International Court of Justice / PCIJ which has been dissolved. Whereas Article 36 (5) Statute of the International Court expressly stated that if there are countries that accept the jurisdiction of the PCIJ with a unilateral declaration then it is considered to be also addressed to the International Court. However this still depends on whether the declaration is still valid and has certain requirements.
As an example of a lawsuit made by Portugal to India in the case of The Right of Passage is based on the Declaration on the acceptance of jurisdiction of the PCIJ by India in 1940. Portugal lawsuit filed to the International Court in 1955 is still considered to remain valid.
Additionally Article 37 Statute of the Court asserted that a treaty or convention that is still valid and has the power in clauses stating that if there is a dispute between the parties will be resolved to the PCIJ, the settlement of the dispute shall be addressed to the international Court. The other thing that reinforces the opinion that the International Court of Justice is the successor to the PCIJ in the applicable procedural law or the Rules of Court derived from Rule of Court PCIJ undergoing changes.
Thus the formation of the International Court can not be separated from the role of a permanent International Court of Justice established by the League of Nations in 1922. The fact that many cases of the PCIJ-kasu that are not completed followed by the International Court of Justice.
The idea of the birth of the United Nations is inseparable from the concept of the formation of the League of Nations (League of Nations) in 1922 which also established the Permanent International Court (The Permanent Court of International Justice / PCIJ) in a bid to maintain peace and efforts to resolve the dispute peacefully.
But there are fundamental differences between the PCIJ and the ICJ is that the state members of the League of Nations does not automatically become a member of PCIJ. This is different from UN member automatically is also a member of or party to litigants in the International Court of Justice under section 19 (1) Charter of the International Court of Justice.
International Court of Justice set up under a statute known as the Statute of the International Court of Justice. This Statute was established by the statutes of the Permanent International Court of Justice / PCIJ had disbanded with various adjustments and reforms according to circumstances and the new organization as one of the main organs of the United Nations.
Thus emerged a few opinion stating that the International Court of Justice is the successor of the Permanent International Court of Justice / PCIJ which has been dissolved. Whereas Article 36 (5) Statute of the International Court expressly stated that if there are countries that accept the jurisdiction of the PCIJ with a unilateral declaration then it is considered to be also addressed to the International Court. However this still depends on whether the declaration is still valid and has certain requirements.
As an example of a lawsuit made by Portugal to India in the case of The Right of Passage is based on the Declaration on the acceptance of jurisdiction of the PCIJ by India in 1940. Portugal lawsuit filed to the International Court in 1955 is still considered to remain valid.
Additionally Article 37 Statute of the Court asserted that a treaty or convention that is still valid and has the power in clauses stating that if there is a dispute between the parties will be resolved to the PCIJ, the settlement of the dispute shall be addressed to the international Court. The other thing that reinforces the opinion that the International Court of Justice is the successor to the PCIJ in the applicable procedural law or the Rules of Court derived from Rule of Court PCIJ undergoing changes.
Thus the formation of the International Court can not be separated from the role of a permanent International Court of Justice established by the League of Nations in 1922. The fact that many cases of the PCIJ-kasu that are not completed followed by the International Court of Justice.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar